VIRGINIA LEGISLATURE.
extract from the message of gov. tyler of virginia.
december 4th, 1809.
A proposition from the State of Pennsylvania is herewith submitted, with Gov. Snyder's letter endorsing the same, in which is suggested the propriety of amending the constitution of the United States so as to prevent collisions between the government of the Union and the State government.
house of delegates.
Friday, Dec., 15th, 1809.
On motion ordered that so much of the Governor's communication as relates to the communication of the Governor of Pennsylvania, on the subject of an amendment proposed by the legislature of the State to the constitution of the United States he referred to Messrs. Peyton, Otey, Cabell, Walker, Madison, Holt, Newton, Parker, Stevenson, Randolph, Cocke, Wayatt and Ritchie.
Thursday, Jan., 11th, 1810.
Mr. Peyton from the committee to whom was referred that part of the Governor's communications which relates to the amendment proposed by the State of Pennsylvania, to the constitution of the United States, made the following
The committee to whom was referred the communication of the Governor of Pennsylvania, covering certain resolutions of the legislature of that State proposing an amendment of the Constitution of the United States by the appointment of an impartial tribunal to decide disputes between the State and Federal judiciary, have had the same, under their consideration, and are of opinion that a tribunal is already provided by the Constitution of the United States to wit; the supreme court, more eminently qualified from their habits and duties, from the mode of their selection, and from the tenure of their offices, to decide the disputes aforesaid in an enlightened and impartial manner than any other tribunal which could be selected.
The members of the supreme court, are selected from those in the United States, who are most celebrated for virtue and legal learning, not at the will of a single individual, but by the concurrent wishes of the President and Senate of the United States; they will therefore have no local prejudices or partialities. The duties they have to perform, lead them necessarily to the most enlarged and accurate acquaintance with the jurisdiction of the Federal and State courts together, and with the admirable symmetry of our Government. The tenure of their offices enables them to pronounce the sound and correct opinions they may have formed without fear, favour, or partiality.
The amendment of the Constitution proposed by Pennsylvania seems to be founded upon the idea that the Federal judiciary will, from a lust of power, enlarge their jurisdiction, to the total annihilation of the jurisdiction of the State courts; that they will exercise their will instead of the law and the Constitution.
This argument, if it proves anything, would operate more strongly against the tribunal proposed to be created, which promises so little, than against the State courts, which, for the reason given, have every thing connected with their appointment calculated to insure confidence. What security have we, were the proposed amendments adopted, that this tribunal would not substitute their will and their pleasure in place of the law? The Judiciary are the weakest of the three departments of government, and least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; they hold neither the purse, nor the sword; and even to enforce their own judgments and decisions, must ultimately depend upon the executive arm. Should the Federal judiciary, however unmindful of their weakness, unmindful of the duty which they owe to themselves, and their country, become corrupt and transcend the limits of their jurisdiction, would the proposed amendment oppose even a probable barrier to such an improbable state of things?
The creation of a tribunal, such as is proposed by Pennsylvania, so far as we are able to form an idea of it, from the description given in the resolutions of the Legislature of the State, would, in the opinion of your Committee, tend rather to invite them to prevent collisions between the Federal and State courts. It might also become in process of time, a serious and dangerous embarrassment to the operations of the general government.
Resolved, therefore: That the Legislature of this State do disapprove of the amendment to the Constitution of the United States proposed by the Legislature of Pennsylvania.
Resolved also: That his Excellency the Governor be, and he is hereby requested to transmit forthwith a copy of the foregoing preamble and resolutions to each of the Senators and representatives of this State in Congress, and to the executives of the several states in the union, with a request that the same be laid before the Legislature thereof.
The said Resolutions being read a second time, were, on motion ordered to be referred to a committee of the whole House on the state of the Commonwealth.
Tuesday, Jan. 23rd, 1810.
The House according to the orders of the day, resolved itself into a Committee of the whole house on the state of the Commonwealth, and after some time spent therein, Mr. Speaker resumed the chair, and Mr. Stannard of Spottsylvania, reported that the Committee had, according to order, had under consideration the preamble and resolution of the select committee, to whom was referred that part of the Governor's communication which relates to the amendment proposed to the constitution of the United States by the Legislature of Pennsylvania, had gone through with the same, and directed him to report them to the House without amendment, which he handed in to the clerk's table.
And the question being put, on agreeing to the said preamble and resolutions, they were agreed to by the House unanimously.
Ordered that the clerk carry the said preamble and resolutions to the Senate, and desire their concurrence.
in senate.
Wednesday, January 24th, 1810.
The preamble and resolutions on the amendment to the constitution of the United States, proposed by the Legislature of Pennsylvania by the appointment of an impartial tribunal to decide disputes between the State and Federal judiciary, being also delivered in, and twice read, on motion was ordered to be committed to Messieurs Nelson, Currie, Campbell, Upshur and Wolfe.
Friday, January 26th, 1810.
Mr. Nelson reported from the committee on the preamble and resolutions on the amendment, proposed by the legislature of Pennsylvania, etc., that the committee had, according to order, taken the said preamble and resolutions under their consideration, and directed him to report them without any amendment.
"This important state paper," says Judge McCue, "can be seen in the works of Daniel Webster, vol. III, pp. 352-54, and so able were these views and resolutions, considered at the time, as to attract the attention of the leading Statesmen of the country, and they guided the other States in the adoption of similar resolutions, thus overthrowing the effort of Pennsylvania to establish a separate and distinct judicial department as arbiter between the Federal and State Governments."
In the great debate in the United States Senate between Daniel Webster and Gen. Hayne, of South Carolina, Mr. Webster quoted Mr. Peyton's preamble and resolutions, as so conclusive of the questions involved, as to admit of no further discussion. In a subsequent pages of Judge McCue's sketch, an interesting conversation between Mr. Webster and Daniel Sheffey is reported.